A Strong Penetration Test Needs a Strong Report
Intro
Many people believe the value of a penetration test is in the hacking itself, the tools, the exploits, and the technical skill. Others think the report is where the real value lies.
The truth is: both matter, but in different ways.
A penetration test without a good report is like a treasure chest locked shut, the value is there, but the client can't use it.
A great report without strong, meaningful findings is just well-written fluff.
The penetration test is where issues are discovered and verified, this is where the real value lies. However, all that work can fall flat if the report is poorly written. The report's role is to present the findings clearly and effectively, ensuring the client can act on them to strengthen their security. Because the findings section is what most readers pay attention to, it is critical that this part of the report communicates the discoveries effectively.
In this blog, we will primarily focus on how to write the actual findings, since, as I said, the findings section is by far the most-read part of a penetration test report. While other sections of a report, such as the executive summary, scope, or methodology, vary between companies and reflect their internal processes, the findings section is a standard part of every report. This is where the key issues, supporting evidence, and recommendations are clearly presented.
Presenting findings clearly and effectively ensures that the effort put into the test results in meaningful improvements and genuine customer satisfaction.
Why the Report Completes the Pentest
The penetration test is where the real discovery happens. It is the heart of the engagement, where vulnerabilities are identified, validated, and documented. The hours spent probing systems, exploiting weaknesses, and collecting evidence give the work its value.
Once the test ends, the systems return to normal and the testers move on. What remains for the client is the report, which captures the results and turns raw findings into something they can act on. A clear, well-structured report becomes a reference point for security teams, IT staff, and executives, helping them make informed decisions.
The client never sees the testing as it happens, so the report is their window into the work. When the test is thorough and the report communicates it effectively, they work together to produce real security improvements and leave the client confident and satisfied with the process.
What Weak Reports Look Like
Some reports reduce the value of the entire test because they:
This leaves decision-makers with raw data but no clear path forward.
General Problems with Writing the Report
One of the biggest challenges after completing a penetration test is communicating the results effectively. Testers sometimes treat the people who will read the report as if they are penetration testers themselves. They use complex terminology, assume knowledge of specific tools, and paste screenshots from Burp Suite or other testing utilities.
This approach might work for an internal security team that already uses these tools daily, but many clients have never even heard of them. If you tell a client, "In order to confirm there is no rate limit on the /login endpoint we are going to use Burp Suite's intruder...", you risk losing them immediately.
Instead, make it easy for them. Provide a simple Python script, curl command, or Bash snippet that reproduces the issue without requiring them to learn a new tool. The client should be able to verify your finding with minimal effort. Think of the client as someone who needs clear, guided steps, not an experienced tester who can fill in the gaps.
Ultimately, a report should be written so that any reader, regardless of their technical background, can understand the issue and take action, turning the effort you invested during testing into changes that actually improve security.
How Findings Should Be Written
The findings section is the most read part of a penetration test report. It is where the evidence of the test comes to life. A well-written finding should follow a clear structure so anyone can understand the issue, its impact, and how to fix it.
Title
Keep it short, precise, and easy to understand. For example, "Broken Function Level Authorization" is clearer than "Vertical Privilege Escalation due to Missing Authorization on the Admin Endpoint." At first, the shorter title may not seem fully descriptive, but your job is to provide the details in other sections such as the description and risks.
Description
Provide a general explanation of the vulnerability so the client understands it conceptually. Avoid deep technical details here. Those belong in the Reproduction Steps section. Also, I often see people explaining possible risks in this section, which is a mistake. You have a separate Risks section for that reason.
Risks
Outline the potential security risks in general terms. Optionally, you can add a sentence like "In this particular scenario we were able to..." followed by the specific impact demonstrated during the test.
Reproduction Steps
Include all technical details and step-by-step instructions specific to the vulnerability so the client can verify the finding. This is where exact payloads, commands, and request samples should be placed. To make reproduction steps richer and easier to follow, include any supporting evidence directly within this section. Also, as mentioned in the previous part of this blog, avoid referencing Burp Suite or other complex tools, keep it simple so the client can reproduce the issue easily.
Evidence
As mentioned in the Reproduction Steps section, include screenshots, code snippets, or logs that visually support and validate the steps provided. Placing evidence here makes it easier for the reader to connect the technical actions to their results.
Recommendations
Provide only general remediation advice, focusing on what needs to be fixed, not exactly how to do it. Avoid step-by-step fixes, since the client should implement the solution in the way that best fits their environment.
Risk Rating
Provide a severity level that reflects both the likelihood of the vulnerability being exploited and the potential impact if it is.
References
If needed, include links to official documentation, security standards, or trusted resources that provide additional information about the vulnerability type or best practices for remediation. This helps the client learn more about the issue and validate the recommendations independently. Make sure the references are relevant and credible so they add real value to the report.
Following this structure ensures that each finding is clear for management while still containing enough detail for technical staff to reproduce and address the issue.
Closing Thoughts
Finding vulnerabilities is only part of the story. The real impact comes when the results of a thorough penetration test are clearly communicated in a way that the organization can understand and act on. Well-structured findings and a client-friendly report transform the technical work of testing into improvements that strengthen security. In the end, it is the combination of a solid test and a clear report that ensures your work makes a lasting difference.